What if I decided to run for President? What would be my platform? What party would I run under? Would anybody vote for me? Do I want to be President?
The last question is easy to answer, NO! I have no desire to lead this country, a state, county, or even a city. I was once approached to be mayor and felt a panic attack at even the thought. I have no lust for power or position. While there is a part of me that wants to make a difference and be a catalyst for positive change, I have no love for the conflict and perseverance such a venture would entail. I also lack the confidence in myself to really believe I could make it happen. Nonetheless, in those moments when my dream of making a difference takes the foreground, I have thought about what it would be like to run for President and what I would offer.
A good president should have an understanding of what is good and what needs to be changed. He or she would then need to have a viable plan on how to improve things and handle challenges as they come. They also need the ability to communicate their vision and plan to others, but let’s skip that part for this exercise and focus on the understanding of how things are and the viable plan. Here is my understanding of some of our strengths and issues as a people.
Let’s talk about the economy:
First, it is my position that the economic problems in our country are based on an unsustainable materialism supported by deficit spending and excessive speculative investment. Our economy is in a position where its only short term growth potential comes from increased consumerism in luxury goods and services—things not needed to feed, cloth, and shelter us or support our employment. At the same time, such consumption can only be funded through unrealistic speculation and through debt, the growth of which in governments, businesses, and individuals cannot be sustained due to debt-to-income and debt-to-asset ratios that are dangerously high.
Related to materialism is an unrealistic expectation of the amount of services that government can or should provide. We can no longer expect government to do more and expect it to do so with the same or lower taxes.
Second, It is my conclusion that the taxing structure has become overly complicated and inequitable. I believe we are taxing the wrong thing, income, and that loopholes and exemptions are resulting in taxes excessively targeted at the middle class.
I see the basic infrastructure of our economy as adequate or adjustable without major re-tooling. I don’t think there is anything inherently wrong with our labor force. Our people are as capable as or more so than those in any other country. The freedoms inherent in our political structure continue to give us tremendous potential to achieve anything we firmly put our mind to accomplish with discipline and integrity.
We could bring in some related issues like the proper role of regulation, the environment, and how the educational system needs to support the goals of society, but let’s keep it relatively simple.
So, what is my plan? First, government must implement a plan to balance the budget within 5 years. This should primarily be done with cuts in government spending. No part of the budget should be exempt and across-the-board cuts would be mandated unless there is bi-partisan agreement to cut some programs and services to salvage cuts to others. If the parties can’t agree on priorities, then percentage cuts across the board would be the fall-back law. Constitutional amendments should require a balanced budget in the future and limit future government spending growth to a percentage of population growth or some other economic indicator—with the exception of short term national emergencies. The amendments should also limit the debt-to-revenue ratio the country is allowed to carry, which should require a significant reduction in the national debt to be achieved over a 10 to 20 year period.
Second, the taxing structure should be moved from primarily taxing income to primarily taxing consumption. A value-added or sales tax should be used to tax consumption on all goods and services, retail and wholesale. Few, if any, exceptions would exist. Income taxes for both individuals and businesses at all levels of government should be phased out. Any remaining income taxes should be a flat tax rate on all income above a certain amount such as a percentage of the poverty level.
You still thinking of voting for me?
Let’s talk about foreign policy:
We live in a global environment and economy. We are interconnected in multiple ways with other countries across the world—if for no other reason than our shared humanity as children of the same deity. While I believe our political and economic system is superior to others in general—especially in certain divinely inspired principles, I also recognize that an excessive nationalism or an attempt to isolate ourselves from the rest of the world is no longer viable, if it ever was. We must be citizens of the world and involved in world events and decisions. By so doing, in a positive manner, we can be a beacon to the rest of the world and a support to societies and cultures that are trying to improve the freedoms and lives if their citizens.
That said, the reality is that while much cooperation and positive interaction between societies is taking place, the world is also fractured along economic, political, and religious lines. Extremists within those factions act in ways to promote their agendas using violence, oppression, and inflammatory propaganda. Countries and societies have the right to defend themselves against such violence and oppression. Less clear is the role of other countries in exercising military force against such elements beyond their borders or as part of a multilateral international force. I am extremely uncomfortable with expending the lives of our men and women in being the world’s police force, especially when such action is taken independent of a multi-country allied force backed by international legislation.
As President, I would take whatever action is necessary to protect our citizens from foreign military action against the borders of our country, or actions against our citizens on international waters or airspace. It would be my policy to limit actions against foreign powers that threaten our interests, but not our borders, to economic restrictions, the expulsion of foreign nationals, and blockades against travel, communication, and trade from the offending country.
Military force used on foreign soil would be used as an extreme last resort and only after consultation with the international community and preferably with the multilateral cooperation of other countries.
I admit to not having all the answers to dealing with violent extremists who use terrorist tactics. I would be open for suggestions. I think there are unexplored opportunities in addressing the historic and economic sources of the hate. What I promise I WOULDN’T do is rely solely or primarily on a military response. I wouldn’t send our sons and daughters into harm's way unless I was so sure of the right that I was willing to send my own children in the front lines and lead them myself.
Other issues:
I know there are a lot of issues I haven’t touched on. What about immigration, both new immigration and dealing with the millions here illegally? What about extending civil rights to groups such as those identifying themselves and gay and lesbian or to others who’s choices and lifestyles challenge judgments about what is moral or damaging to society? Well, maybe in future installments.
So, do you think I would be elected? Do you think I might even have a significant following? Do you think either party would back me? I don’t. So let me talk about why. I believe that a representative government such as ours can never long do other than reflect the general beliefs and norms of the society it represents, good or bad. We are in the fixes we are because as a society we have been unwilling to face the hard choices it would have taken to avoid the present circumstances. I don’t think we are yet willing to face those choices.
For instance, we criticize government for excessive spending, but as a society we have the highest debt-to-income and debt-to-asset ratios of any generation in history. As a people, we seem unwilling to live within our means and save for a rainy day. We want everything that previous generations have had to work years to achieve and more and we want it now—even if we are under or unemployed. Are we really going to vote for a guy that tells us we have to tighten our belts, live without, and give up government services we have come to rely on? No, we’ll vote for the guy that says he can cut spending without cutting our pet programs and without raising taxes. We’ll vote for the lady who says she can save our homes from foreclosure even though we can’t pay what we agreed to pay. We’ll vote for the politician that says he will boost the economy with stimulus checks and extended un-employment benefits—all on the assumption that when things improve we can balance the budget and pay it all back.
As a society, we want government to protect us from all the evils in the world—except the ones we want to indulge in. Even then, if we destroy our bodies with substances or suffer the consequences of risky behavior, we want government to pay for our medical care and provide us disability benefits. Whether it is terrorists or hurricanes, we want to either be protected or reimbursed by government so that we are made financially whole. Against threats at home and abroad, we want tough talk and oversimplified analysis that make things black and white and doesn’t challenge us to see things from multiple perspectives. And as long as it is somebody else’s relative, we are OK with putting our citizens in harms way so we can punish the bad guys/gals of the world.
So, no, I don’t think I would be elected. Nobody is going to vote for somebody who attempts to tell the truth and calls for reality in government and society. We want the pretty party line that says it can solve all our problems without sacrifice and gives rights and benefits without responsibility. We will elect somebody that says all our problems are brought on us by the other guy, especially foreigners and the other party. I’m afraid I couldn’t be that person, even if I really wanted to be president.
